Duadata Limited v Tian Cha Le Limited

Decision date: 8 May 2026

Neutral citation: [2026] EWHC 1055 (IPEC)

Overall AI summary confidence: high

AI Notice: Any short overview, ratio decidendi summary or obiter dicta summary shown on this page is AI-generated, provided only to help users assess potential relevance more quickly, and may be wholly inaccurate. No liability is accepted for the accuracy of any such summary, regardless of any AI confidence rating shown. Users should check the underlying decision and obtain appropriate legal advice rather than relying on any summary.

Short overview

This short overview is intended to summarise the case, issues and outcome so far as they are supported by the judgment.

AI confidence in this short overview: high

This was an inquiry into damages following a default judgment for passing off by Duadata (MOOBOO) against Tian Cha Le (TCL) alleging copying of menu design, products and recipes. The court held Duadata could quantify its loss by reference to a hypothetical franchise for a South Shields store, accepted the pleaded Points of Claim (with statements of truth) as evidential material on the papers, and awarded damages of £14,350 (VAT excluded); costs and ancillary matters were reserved for further submissions.

Ratio decidendi

This summary is intended to identify the ratio decidendi, meaning the legal reasons for deciding and the binding part of the decision.

AI confidence in this ratio decidendi summary: high

Where the facts reasonably permit, a claimant in a passing-off damages inquiry may quantify loss by hypothesising a commercial arrangement (here, a franchise) and the court may accept pleaded material bearing a statement of truth as evidence in an on-the-papers damages inquiry where parties have effectively proceeded on that basis.

Obiter dicta

This summary is intended to identify obiter dicta, meaning observations made by the way that were not necessary to deciding the case and are not binding.

AI confidence in this obiter dicta summary: medium

The judgment indicated (obiter) that the defendant’s financial state or profitability is not relevant to assessing the claimant’s loss, and that in damages inquiries it is permissible to infer loss from facts subject to reasonable assumptions.

Warning

The chunk contains substantial duplication/repetition of the same material. Notes contain substantial duplication; they appear to reflect a single-chunk summary of the written on-the-papers inquiry and may not include the full hearing record.

Source links

Judgment page Judgment PDF Judgment XML